> I think such a beast would provide the foundations for a serious
> effort to bring the distributions back together.  I know many resist
> such efforts because of Python (a pet hate of mine, even though I
> don't know it from Adam), HG and codereview and I resist accusing them
> of reactionary behaviour; I do wish we could get past that problem,
> though.

fwiw...

i use a derivative of nemo's patch system.  all changes are applied through
patches.  anyone can comment on a patch, and comments, and patch
dispositions are mailed to everyone on the list.  the list is open to
general discussion.  the patch system allows folks to pull (not executables)
or apply patches themselves, so in spirit it's closer to git than hg.

i'm open to any sort of gateway to hg/codereview/git that folks find useful.
i just don't want hg to be a requirement.  one of the things i value about
plan 9 is the fact that it's a self-contained system.  requiring hg and websites
runs counter this.  i haven't carved out the time to do anything about it,
but patches are welcome.

i think a key bit to collaboration is going to be setting some ground rules.
and the most important one imho is having a clear goal.

off the top of my head, how about having the best plan 9 we can afford,
which runs on as much hardware, and as many vms as possible.  right out
of the box.

what do yall think?

- erik